…because if we can’t police our own, then the Republican Party no longer represents conservatives.

Tonight was the most expensive punt in American history.  Sequestration in 60 days, debt ceiling in 60 days, $3.9 trillion in added debt regardless, and a 41:1 ratio in increased taxation to spending cuts, with an average tax increase of $1,635 on the American family making $50,000 or more.

Frankly, I’m speechless — and more than a bit angry.  I’m floored that this was the end result.  Simpson-Bowles would have been better than this… this… steaming pile of horse crap.


Update: Virginia’s delegation nearly unanimously voted against HR 8. Democrat Gerry Connolly being the only one to vote in favor of the bill.

Here are some notable statements from House members.


“I have consistently called for a comprehensive solution to our nation’s fiscal crisis, one that reduces spending – the principal driver of our deficit – and generates more revenue through tax reform and economic growth. While the bill that came to the floor does generate additional revenue, it fails to reduce spending. In fact it increases spending.”


“Responsibly reducing our budget deficit requires making tough, unpopular choices. We didn’t do that today since this bill does nothing to reduce our deficit. In fact, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the bill will add $3.9 trillion to our deficit. It does, however, make the task of responsibly reducing our deficit all the more difficult and makes it much more likely that seniors, the disabled, students, and our most vulnerable communities will bear the greatest burden when Congress eventually pays for what we did today.”


“The Senate proposal provides permanent tax relief to most Americans, and I believe that is a step in the right direction toward creating certainty for our families and small business owners. The proposal also enacts permanent estate tax relief for our small businesses and family farmers who need certainty in our tax code. But at a time when we as a nation own a 16 trillion dollar debt and borrow 45 cents on every dollar we spend, this legislation does absolutely nothing to address the federal government’s spending problem – in fact it only adds to it.

“At a time when members of both parties agree that we need to cut spending, the Senate proposal makes virtually no spending cuts. At a time when we all know that our Social Security and Medicare programs are primary drivers of our spending, this legislation makes no necessary reforms. And, inexplicably, at a time when reining in reckless spending should be our primary concern, this legislation proposes billions of dollars in new spending.


“Reasonable people can disagree whether or not to support this Senate compromise. In fairness to those that voted yes, there are some good things in the bill. However, increasing spending for programs and paying for a two month delay of sequestration in part with new “revenues” were items that I could not support. In reviewing bills, I look at the short-term as well as the long-term consequences because they will affect our children and grandchildren for years to come. Passing a bill that raises revenues with only minor cuts is not a balanced approach, and is an approach that adds to the debt our children and grandchildren will be responsible for paying back.”


“I regretfully voted against the American Taxpayer Relief Act today because it unfortunately does what Congress does best – kicks the can down the road. While I support low tax rates for Americans and have previously voted to ensure taxes do not go up on hardworking Americans, I could not vote for this bill because it does nothing to reform our long-term spending problems, which are the real drivers of our debt and deficits. In addition, this bill postpones sequestration, the disastrous defense cuts, for only two months. This creates even more uncertainty for our defense industry, which is so vital to the security of this nation. This bill is the epitome of what is wrong with Washington – waiting until the very last minute to pass a package negotiated by only a few.”

  • Cantor is the wrong choice. To date he has been in lockstep with Boehner and will lead us to more betrayals. We need someone who has the courage to take risks in order to do the right thing.

  • Lets start a horse crap party.. Load up your manure spreaders and fling the poo at Congress.. My John Deere has a high enough gear to get there with a fresh steaming pile of Virginia Beach’s finest manure by Friday..

  • Eric Cantor may have done a slick job taking advantage of a crucial vote, and conservatives short memories to win the speakership. To anyone who thinks Cantor would be much better, this is the guy who aggressively whipped together the votes to shove through Bush’s bailouts in 2008 which helped escalate this spending problem. He is in the bed with special interests and regularly shows his disdain for the grassroots activists. While we should try to oust Boehner, making Cantor speaker is not a victory at all.

  • Michael Jordan

    I mean jesus christ this is bad, but Cantor? Because he takes advantage of one vote were going to throw our support behind him?

  • Pingback: Don’t just cut Congressional pay, cut Congressional elegance()

  • pinecone321

    Cantor waited until there were enough yea votes before he voted no. Same with McCarthy. Last week Cantor was guaranteeing that there were enough R votes to pass Plan b, and that was just a few hours before the vote was cancelled because they knew all along they didn’t have the votes. Also, don’t forget that Cantor said that the R’s don’t want to get rid of all of Obamacare. Cantor is an opportunist and a power seeker, and lacks any ability to talk in conservative language, because it isn’t a part of his DNA. Electing Cantor as speaker would just be switching deck chairs on the Titanic. Eric Cantor is a sensitive whinner, he is not a leader.

  • Well Shaun, I think you just witnessed the end of Cantor’s ascendancy and the beginning of his demise. Having helped spike the grand bargain that would have dramatically cut spending, he got so badly outmaneurered that he had to enjoy one evening of typical rabble rousing before rational and sane people put him back in his place. As the leader of the tea party republicans, we just say the worst of divisive politics and the best in partisanship compromise. The fact that you can’t see that is disturbing.

    • Only a pedophile could call Cantor a leader of anything tea party. That is simply outrageous dude.

  • Okay – so people don’t like Boehner and they don’t like Cantor. Who’s the alternative?

    • We have a handful of conservative No votes.. Lets look there..

      • But who is senior enough to beat all of them? The only name I’ve heard as a dark horse is Pete Roskam.

        • I heard Tom Price is looking at running. I would also think Hensarling could be a good option.

          • pinecone321

            Tom Price was on talk radio this morning and refused to deny that he is interested and may seek the Speakers seat. He did deny interest in Dec. but much has changed with Boehner over the last few weeks particularly. I would be surprised if he wasn’t put up for a vote tomorrow.

          • If I could pick the next Speaker it would be Rep. Walter Jones of NC. He’s got enough seniority to make the bid, is a reliable small-government conservative, and has enough independence to make a credible claim that he is not just more of the same.

  • rtwingtroll

    Three words: A complete opportunist.

    Shawn I realize you are part of the A-team now, but please, don’t troll and shill at this level. It demeans you, almost as much as your raising taxes as a Supervisor and then crowing about fiscal “responsibility.”


    • Couple points, “troll”.

      First, if you’re going to be a jerk, at least spell his name right. It’s “Shaun”. Second, use your name. Don’t be a coward.

      • rtwingtroll

        heh = no

        • Then a troll you shall remain and you shall be ignored. Cheers!

  • Chad Parker

    Even in his own district, the only people who like Eric Cantor are those who use the Henrico party structure to advance themselves in some way. The Henrico GOP feeds off Cantor, who uses that symbiotic relationship to avoid serious challengers. I firmly believe that if a strong pragmatic Republican opposed Cantor in a primary, Cantor would go down in flames.

  • Pingback: Obenshain gets endorsements; Cuccinelli, a campaign manager | Bearing Drift()

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.